Markets evolve. Consumer behaviour changes. Technology creates new opportunities and risks. Rules that were appropriate when they were introduced may need to be updated, simplified or, in some cases, removed altogether.

That is why the FCA regularly reviews its rules.

How the FCA reviews its rules

Reviews help us keep regulation effective and proportionate, improve future rule-making and ensure we remain accountable for our decisions.

Sometimes we do this under our Rule Review Framework using evidence assessments, post-implementation reviews (PIRs) and impact evaluations.

These reviews help us understand whether interventions have achieved their objectives, and what lessons can be learned.

An early example was our review of the high-cost short-term credit price cap, which found that the intervention was delivering better outcomes for consumers. That evidence, alongside feedback from industry and consumer stakeholders, informed our recent decision to maintain the existing cap.

• our PIR on value measure rules in general insurance
• evaluation of our 2019 overdrafts intervention
• evaluation of the 2020 ban on contingent charging in pensions

We are also currently progressing an evaluation of our 2018 persistent debt interventions and will publish that soon.

But formal reviews are only one part of how we learn from experience.

We also explore how rules are affecting firms, consumers and markets through our ongoing supervisory activities, data monitoring, market studies and calls for evidence.

Stakeholders can also tell us through our feedback tool whether our rules are working as intended.

Reviewing rules is also an important part of the wider regulatory reform now underway. As responsibility for more rules moves into the FCA Handbook, we are revisiting existing requirements, seeking views through consultations and considering whether rules are achieving their objectives in practice or need updating.

Recent examples include the Advice Guidance Boundary Review and reforms to investment research rules. The high standards and outcomes-focused approach of the Consumer Duty allows us to look again at where we can reduce reliance on more prescriptive rules and provide firms greater flexibility.

Whenever we consult on changing existing new rules or frameworks, the purpose is the same: to understand whether the previous rules have delivered as intended, to test what is happening in practice and to use that evidence to make better decisions so that we can future-proof our rule set as much as possible.

FCA rule review examples

Mortgages

In 2025, as part of our Mortgage Rule Review, we introduced changes designed to simplify requirements and provide greater flexibility for firms and consumers.

We removed guidance that was no longer needed.

We also made it easier for consumers to remortgage with a new lender, reduce borrowing costs by shortening their mortgage term and discuss options with firms while retaining the option of seeking advice.

Senior Managers and Certification Regime

In 2026, we completed the first phase of reforms to the Senior Managers and Certification Regime. After reviewing how the regime worked in practice, we introduced targeted changes to make it more efficient and proportionate while maintaining strong individual accountability.

We are now consulting on a second phase of broader reforms that will become possible when new legislation is finalised, following input to that review.

Wholesale markets

We have also reviewed reporting requirements across wholesale markets.

In August 2026, we announced changes to the UK transaction-reporting regime to reduce duplicative and low-value reporting requirements.

The reforms reduce the number of reporting fields, remove some reporting obligations altogether and are expected to save firms more than £100m each year.

IPO research

Also in August 2026, we amended rules, so firms no longer have to wait 7 days to publish research connected to an IPO.

The change is intended to speed up the listing process and reduce risk for companies. This followed a consultation in the spring, with rule changes taking immediate effect.  
 

Why reviewing financial regulation matters: effectiveness, learning and accountability

Whether we are conducting a formal rule review or a call for evidence, we should not assume that regulation remains optimal simply because it was the right approach when introduced. We need to keep testing our assumptions, gathering evidence and adapting when circumstances change.

First, reviewing our work helps keep regulation effective and proportionate. Evidence can show where rules are achieving their objectives, where they may be creating unintended consequences and where we can simplify requirements while maintaining protections.

Second, it helps us become a smarter regulator. Looking back at how rules perform in practice helps us understand what is working, where change may be needed and how we can design better regulation in the future.

Third, it supports accountability. Stakeholders rightly expect regulators to act where there are potential harms or opportunities to make markets work better. They also expect us to explain our decisions and revisit interventions if they do not work as intended or markets change.

How firms and consumers inform FCA rule reviews

External input is an important part of this process. We seek views through consultations when reviewing existing requirements and developing new rules. We also gather evidence from firms, consumer groups and other stakeholders as part of PIRs and other review activity.

As expectations of regulators evolve, we want to be clearer about this aspect of our work. Not because every piece of evidence amounts to a formal evaluation, but because reviewing, learning and adapting are fundamental to effective regulation.

Good regulation does not end when a rule is introduced. Good regulation is a framework that delivers good outcomes for consumers and markets, while standing the test of time for both today and tomorrow.